NNAMDI KANU'S COURT CASE: What you must know about Kanu's court case today 12 January 2017 that Nigeria media won't allow you know

What you must know about Kanu's court case
today 12 January 2017 that Nigeria media won't allow you know

NNAMDI KANU'S COURT CASE TODAY AT THE HIGH
COURT ABUJA IS ABOUT WHAT IS CALLED PRIMA FACIE IN LAW. THIS SIMPLY MEANS THAT
KANU'S LAWYERS ARE TELLING BINTA NYAKO THAT NIGERIA HAS NO EVIDENCE AGAINST
HIM, THEREFORE HE IS INNOCENT OF ALL CHARGES!

Again Kanu have argued convincingly that
BUHARI does not know the meaning of Self Determination hence he is confusing it
with attempt to secede from Nigeria.

To the uneducated mind, both self
determination and secession may appear to mean the same thing, but in Common
Sense and LAW they are not. The court today 12 January 2017, is about exposing
to the world what Buhari has been hiding from the public and that is the fact
that Kanu has no case to answer.

What is a Prima Facie Case?

The term translates from Latin as,
essentially, the case at first sight. As that phrase implies, it is a way to
evaluate a case at an initial stage to see if there is any support for bringing
it to trial. A party with the burden of proof, in this case Buhari's regime,
presents a prima facie case when the party presents enough evidence to support
a verdict in the party’s favor, assuming the opposing party does not rebut or
disprove it. This means that the party with the burden of proof has shown that
he or she can meet that burden as to each element of his or her case.

**Note**

Where a party with the burden of proof (Buhari
appointed Prosecutors) cannot present a prima facie case against Kanu, his
lawyers by law will apply for the charges to be dismissed because Buhari cannot
possibly win the case. This is why Mogaji Labaran the Buhari prosecutor in the
matter does not want Justice Binta Nyako to hear the application for the
establishment of prima facie in the case against Kanu and the others. Because
they Government of Nigeria knows there is not enough evidence to convict KANU and
the others. That is why they opted for secret trial in order to tender
incriminating evidence that cannot be challenged by this process.

What today's court is about is that the
prosecution i.e. Buhari, has to present a prima facie case that Kanu is guilty
of the crime charged. If Buhari cannot present evidence supporting each element
of the crime they charged KANU with, then Binta Nyako must acquit him (even
without having presented any evidence).

For example, where a prosecutor has charged
a defendant with burglary, the prosecution must present evidence that the
defendant made an entry into premises without authorization. If the
prosecution’s only evidence is that the defendant was found sometime after the
burglary to be in possession of items stolen from the premises, that evidence
alone will not support a burglary charge. The defendant would not have to offer
any evidence but could request an acquittal based on the prosecution’s failure
to make out a prima facie case of burglary.

A prima facie case is an early screen for a
court to determine whether the prosecution can go forward to try the defendant
fully for the crime. As such, the standard of proof that the prosecution must
satisfy at the prima facie case stage is lower than that for proof that the
defendant is guilty. In order to establish a prima facie case, a prosecutor
need only offer credible evidence in support of each element of a crime. By
contrast, a prosecutor must prove defendant’s guilt as to each element beyond a
reasonable doubt to win a conviction. So, even if a prosecutor can present
enough evidence to establish a prima facie case as to all elements of a crime,
the prosecution must nevertheless still prove defendant’s guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. This is a constitutional requirement.

-Practical effect-

If a prosecutor cannot establish a prima
facie case, that almost certainly means he did not have probable cause to
support the arrest of the defendant. That, in turn, means that the charges
would be dismissed even before getting to the stage of the prosecution offering
her prima facie case. As a result, the prosecution in most criminal trials has
no difficulty establishing a prima facie case because the defendant would have
already been released otherwise.

-Next phase—defendant’s case-

The defendant has the opportunity to offer
evidence disputing each element of the crime that the prosecution has
established in its prima facie case. And, the prosecution must prove each
element beyond a reasonable doubt, so the defendant’s main goal is usually just
to cast doubt upon the prosecution's proof. If the defendant succeeds in doing
so, he should be acquitted.

Real Significance to a Defendant

If a
person charged with a crime can challenge the charge early and on the
inadequacies of the prima facie case (or, better yet, the grounds for arrest),
that person can save him- or herself time and money (and avoid a potential
criminal penalty).